From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vertical Sys. Analysis, Inc. v. Balzano

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 25, 2019
171 A.D.3d 621 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)

Opinion

9089 Index 650808/17

04-25-2019

VERTICAL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS, INC., Plaintiff–Appellant, v. Peter J. BALZANO, Defendant–Respondent.

Law Offices of Edward Weissman, New York (Edward Weissman of counsel), for appellant. Bashwiner & Deer, LLC, New York (Joseph A. Deer of counsel), for respondent.


Law Offices of Edward Weissman, New York (Edward Weissman of counsel), for appellant.

Bashwiner & Deer, LLC, New York (Joseph A. Deer of counsel), for respondent.

Sweeny, J.P., Manzanet–Daniels, Tom, Kapnick, Moulton, JJ.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Barbara Jaffe, J.), entered July 5, 2018, which granted defendant's motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The motion court correctly granted dismissal. Defendant established, as a matter of law, that he did not violate the parties' employment agreement including its nonsolicitation provision. Defendant, an elevator inspector, did not provide unique or extraordinary services or have access to any trade secrets or propriety information that would require the enforcement of a restrictive covenant ( Harris v. Patients Med., P.C. , 169 A.D.3d 433, 93 N.Y.S.3d 299 [1st Dept. 2019] ). In opposition, plaintiff failed to raise any issue of material fact. The evidence plaintiff presented to demonstrate defendant's alleged intention to violate the nonsolicitation clause was unauthenticated and unavailing. No damages as a result of defendant's actions were alleged. Plaintiff failed to demonstrate that the nonsolicitation clause was reasonable as a matter of law ( BDO Seidman v. Hirshberg , 93 N.Y.2d 382, 388–389, 690 N.Y.S.2d 854, 712 N.E.2d 1220 [1999] ).

With respect to the defamation claim, plaintiff failed to plead it with the required particularity ( CPLR 3016[a] ; Dillon v. City of New York , 261 A.D.2d 34, 38, 704 N.Y.S.2d 1 [1st Dept. 1999] ). Specifically, the complaint fails to state whether the utterances were verbal or written, the specific time and location at which the utterances were made and, most critically, to identify a single person who allegedly heard the offending utterances. No damages were alleged.

We have considered the parties' remaining contentions and find them unavailing.


Summaries of

Vertical Sys. Analysis, Inc. v. Balzano

Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.
Apr 25, 2019
171 A.D.3d 621 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
Case details for

Vertical Sys. Analysis, Inc. v. Balzano

Case Details

Full title:Vertical Systems Analysis, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Peter J. Balzano…

Court:Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, New York.

Date published: Apr 25, 2019

Citations

171 A.D.3d 621 (N.Y. App. Div. 2019)
2019 N.Y. Slip Op. 3138
97 N.Y.S.3d 467

Citing Cases

Pashko v. City of N.Y.

As to the defamation action, the Court notes that while plaintiff did not specifically bring a cross motion,…

Marra v. First Access Entm't

The plaintiff alleges, in effect, that the defendant defamed him in connection with his trade, business or…